Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The bulk update request #12606 is pending approval.
change category young_fingering (0) -> general
Reason: Not sure why this tag was made invalid. It was an odd outlier in my tagging favorites list for a long time. Young_fingered is valid, though.
I don't see topic in search and metasearch just shows that it has 0 results(duh).
Tag removal history shows it was mostly Slyroon removing it?
Category changes aren't going to show up in the metasearch, and searching topics for BUR scripts isn't also going to provide many results (the script lines aren't in the post, so unless people are mentioning the tag you won't find any matches)
You should look at the tag type versions:
https://e621.net/tag_type_versions?search[tag]=young_fingering
Also while I agree it shouldn't be in the invalid category, I'm hesitant to say it should be made a valid tag and would lean closer to aliasing it away
donovan_dmc said:
Category changes aren't going to show up in the metasearch, and searching topics for BUR scripts isn't also going to provide many results (the script lines aren't in the post, so unless people are mentioning the tag you won't find any matches)You should look at the tag type versions:
https://e621.net/tag_type_versions?search[tag]=young_fingeringAlso while I agree it shouldn't be in the invalid category, I'm hesitant to say it should be made a valid tag and would lean closer to aliasing it away
Well, it's a super rare kink. Not sure what other tag would be equivalent.
I'm a bit dubious of making tags that are this specific. If we make a tag for one type of young_<verb> we should logically make tags for all of them, and that would create quite a bit of bloat. I would just leave it at young_penetrating. A combo search of young_penetrating fingering should have a very high success rate.
...Although that runs into the long-running issue that fingering isn't considered penetration, and the initiative to fix that seems like it will be deadlocked until the Sun burns out.
beholding said:
I'm a bit dubious of making tags that are this specific. If we make a tag for one type of young_<verb> we should logically make tags for all of them, and that would create quite a bit of bloat. I would just leave it at young_penetrating. A combo search of young_penetrating fingering should have a very high success rate....Although that runs into the long-running issue that fingering isn't considered penetration, and the initiative to fix that seems like it will be deadlocked until the Sun burns out.
This is one reason why I have stayed the hell away from tagging projects recent years, because it used to be that combination tags are full on nope, because of this exact reason as we would have infinite number of tags by just combining pre-exsisting tags.
I'm not entirely sure if that would be good or bad, but considering we have a lot of combination tags, which are also then implicating like five more combination tags which implicate the original tags, we are already on that slope.
mairo said:
This is one reason why I have stayed the hell away from tagging projects recent years, because it used to be that combination tags are full on nope, because of this exact reason as we would have infinite number of tags by just combining pre-exsisting tags.
I'm not entirely sure if that would be good or bad, but considering we have a lot of combination tags, which are also then implicating like five more combination tags which implicate the original tags, we are already on that slope.
two_tone_fingerless_elbow_gloves still haunts me despite now being aliased away, last I remember the implication chains ran over 5 levels deep and ended up with more than 20 tags from that singular starting point
(ridiculous trees like this are one of the reasons that the rules only count non-implied tags since many singular implication trees easily reach 10 tags)
Yeah, the x_fingering and y_fingered tags were created in first place to replace x_fingering_y.
